"Why Pentax and not Nikon?"


jackitec

Link Posted 05/06/2010 - 23:52
Mike, weather sealing is good the sun won't get through the joints,

Jack,

Mannesty

Link Posted 06/06/2010 - 00:00
Mike-P wrote:
I bought Pentax mainly for the weather sealing .. which seems a bit strange now I come to think of it because I was living in Spain at the time.

Must've been to keep the dust out Mike.
Peter E Smith

My flickr Photostream

johnriley

Link Posted 06/06/2010 - 00:29
Weather Sealing in Manchester seems quite appropriate much of the time. It's rather liberating to be able to carry on shooting in the rain.

Bad weather makes for some excellent images.
Best regards, John

womble

Link Posted 06/06/2010 - 01:58
Did you ask why he bought Nikon?

I find these sort of conversations bizarre, really. I don't question why someone else prefers the make they have, I just know that Pentax suits the sort of things I like to do. The capabilities of the camera, in my case anyway, far outstrips the abilities of the photographer. I never think to ask why someone bought a Ford rather than a Renault, or a Blackberry rather than an iPhone. As long as the person using the equipment is happy, what on earth does it matter what I think?

Each to their own, vive la difference, and all that jazz...

K.
Kris Lockyear
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera… they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.

My website

K10D

Link Posted 06/06/2010 - 07:59
robbie_d wrote:
K10D wrote:
Quote:
I chose them for pretty much the same reasons as the OP. Plus the K-m was the best camera around for the money at the time I bought it.
The fact that any K mount lens will fit, work, and benefit from shake reduction just makes life so much simpler than Canon or Nikon users who seem to have to choose legacy lenses incredibly carefully.

Yet my Nikon works with every Nikon lens since 1977 and all AF Nikon lenses since 1986. How far back do we need to go?

The majority of buyers will not be buying a new Pentax body to use with a legacy lens.

Regards

Does your Nikon also stabilise those old lenses?

When I said "Amazing legacy lens support" it stretched further than just being able to fit the lenses on the camera.

The Nikon does not stabilise old lenses, neither do any of my Pentaxes that were made before my K10D. My only stabilised Nikon lens is the 70-200 f/2.8 VR. My 14-24 and 24-70 don't have VR. Since I can use them at silly high ISO, noise free, why do I need VR on short glass?

My Minolta 7D does as it preceded the K10D by two years. Pentax must have thought it a good idea to copy the Minolta route rather than Canon or Nikon with regards to IS.

All this is irrelevant. IS is not one of my reasons for buying a camera.

I use different systems on their own merit and never ask a fellow photographer why they use their choice over what I use.

Truth be told, when people see me with more than one brand of camera, they more often than not ask about the Pentax and the Minolta with genuine interest.

Regards
cameradextrous _ Motorcycles etc. link

NeilP

Link Posted 06/06/2010 - 08:30
Daniel Bridge wrote:
jackitec wrote:
...when you can see the anti shake lenses working in the viewfinder it does give you a little more confidence in the photos you have just taken,

Jack

I can see the advantage to this, from a visual point of view.

However, I was using a Nikon at odd times today, and have to say the whine the VR makes when it's active drives me up the wall. Am I the only one that can hear it?

Dan

My friend uses a D300 and never uses the VR on any of the Lenses as it makes his photos less sharp. To be fair these lenses don't have the latest version of Nikons VR but the antishake on my k20d performs admirably, even with my 500mm sigma
UK Wildlife blog ----- UK Wildlife Facebook page ----- UK wildlife Twitter

flossie

Link Posted 06/06/2010 - 08:40
Shirley your need for IS/VR/SR depends on how often you hand-hold with medium/long exposures NOT how long your lens is or what the body is.

At 1/1000th second, you aren't going to wobble. At 1/10th second, you are.

The only area that the lens/body could affect is how well you can hold your hands steady - but the individuals strength will have a lot more to do with that...
Still shooting in the dark (literally and metaphorically)...
Last Edited by flossie on 06/06/2010 - 08:42

robbie_d

Link Posted 06/06/2010 - 10:01
womble wrote:
Did you ask why he bought Nikon?

I find these sort of conversations bizarre, really. I don't question why someone else prefers the make they have, I just know that Pentax suits the sort of things I like to do. The capabilities of the camera, in my case anyway, far outstrips the abilities of the photographer. I never think to ask why someone bought a Ford rather than a Renault, or a Blackberry rather than an iPhone. As long as the person using the equipment is happy, what on earth does it matter what I think?

Each to their own, vive la difference, and all that jazz...

K.

Exactly the point I was making. Even when presented with my (entirely reasonable) criteria for selecting Pentax, I was still met with the "Why didn't you buy a Nikon?" line. I just found it odd that despite showing that I had researched my decision and made it based on individual merits, he couldn't see it.
If you can't say something nice about Pentax, you won't say anything at all.

Apparently.

robbie_d

Link Posted 06/06/2010 - 10:05
K10D wrote:
robbie_d wrote:
Quote:
Dangermouse wrote:
I chose them for pretty much the same reasons as the OP. Plus the K-m was the best camera around for the money at the time I bought it.
The fact that any K mount lens will fit, work, and benefit from shake reduction just makes life so much simpler than Canon or Nikon users who seem to have to choose legacy lenses incredibly carefully.

Yet my Nikon works with every Nikon lens since 1977 and all AF Nikon lenses since 1986. How far back do we need to go?

The majority of buyers will not be buying a new Pentax body to use with a legacy lens.

Regards

Does your Nikon also stabilise those old lenses?

When I said "Amazing legacy lens support" it stretched further than just being able to fit the lenses on the camera.

The Nikon does not stabilise old lenses, neither do any of my Pentaxes that were made before my K10D. My only stabilised Nikon lens is the 70-200 f/2.8 VR. My 14-24 and 24-70 don't have VR. Since I can use them at silly high ISO, noise free, why do I need VR on short glass?

My Minolta 7D does as it preceded the K10D by two years. Pentax must have thought it a good idea to copy the Minolta route rather than Canon or Nikon with regards to IS.

All this is irrelevant. IS is not one of my reasons for buying a camera.

I use different systems on their own merit and never ask a fellow photographer why they use their choice over what I use.

Truth be told, when people see me with more than one brand of camera, they more often than not ask about the Pentax and the Minolta with genuine interest.

Regards



IS/SR may not be one of your criteria for buying a camera, that doesn't mean it is a bad reason for someone that values it.

Also, I've never asked why someone has chosen a particular system over another, though I'd like to think that if I did, and they presented good reasons for doing so, that I would accept that. That was kind of the point of this post. It wasn't a dig at Nikon, it mentions Nikon as that is what they guy shot with.
If you can't say something nice about Pentax, you won't say anything at all.

Apparently.

K10D

Link Posted 06/06/2010 - 10:26
robbie_d wrote:
K10D wrote:
Quote:
K10D wrote:
Dangermouse wrote:
I chose them for pretty much the same reasons as the OP. Plus the K-m was the best camera around for the money at the time I bought it.
The fact that any K mount lens will fit, work, and benefit from shake reduction just makes life so much simpler than Canon or Nikon users who seem to have to choose legacy lenses incredibly carefully.

Yet my Nikon works with every Nikon lens since 1977 and all AF Nikon lenses since 1986. How far back do we need to go?

The majority of buyers will not be buying a new Pentax body to use with a legacy lens.

Regards

Does your Nikon also stabilise those old lenses?

When I said "Amazing legacy lens support" it stretched further than just being able to fit the lenses on the camera.

The Nikon does not stabilise old lenses, neither do any of my Pentaxes that were made before my K10D. My only stabilised Nikon lens is the 70-200 f/2.8 VR. My 14-24 and 24-70 don't have VR. Since I can use them at silly high ISO, noise free, why do I need VR on short glass?

My Minolta 7D does as it preceded the K10D by two years. Pentax must have thought it a good idea to copy the Minolta route rather than Canon or Nikon with regards to IS.

All this is irrelevant. IS is not one of my reasons for buying a camera.

I use different systems on their own merit and never ask a fellow photographer why they use their choice over what I use.

Truth be told, when people see me with more than one brand of camera, they more often than not ask about the Pentax and the Minolta with genuine interest.

Regards



IS/SR may not be one of your criteria for buying a camera, that doesn't mean it is a bad reason for someone that values it.

Also, I've never asked why someone has chosen a particular system over another, though I'd like to think that if I did, and they presented good reasons for doing so, that I would accept that. That was kind of the point of this post. It wasn't a dig at Nikon, it mentions Nikon as that is what they guy shot with.



Then we agree Rob.

I did not mean to infer that IS/SR was a bad reason to buy.
Also no issue with digs at Nikon or any make. The only recent brands I don't own in digital or film is Leica (no MF or larger).

Regards
cameradextrous _ Motorcycles etc. link

Pwynnej

Link Posted 06/06/2010 - 12:20
Hand up from another Nikon user...(see sig)

The D3 does so many things well, some things us Pentaxians wish Pentax would emulate (high ISO performance and AF) - and despite the fact that the K20D has a good viewfinder in DSLR terms it's very small compared to when I pick up the Z-1p or the D3.

The Nikon lens legacy, althought the F-mount is 51 years old, is a bit of a fallacy. Much in the way that some Pentax lenses are incompatible on KAF2-crippled bodies, limiting their use. What isn't always apparent that the guys who have bought D40, D40x, D60,D3000 and D5000 aren't aware that pre-AF-S lenses won't work on their bodies.

When I use the K20D with a prime lens I am always reminded about how good Pentaxes are to use, the AF may be slow, but the picture I get are sublime. Even with the FA 135 I acquired from Mannesty I experienced joy.

And in my case, no amount of techno-wizardry will compensate for my gawd-ofal photographic technique
K20D, Z-1p, Z-1
F50 1.7,FAs 24,31,35,50 1.4,77,85,135. DA*16-50. DA*60-250. DA*300 D-FA 100
SA 12-24.
Metz 45 CL-4, AF500FTZ. AF540FGZ.
Some Mamiya and some Nikon

Mongoose

Link Posted 06/06/2010 - 14:35
Interestingly, I've never had a corresponding conversation in my other hobbies.

I'd discussed why I prefer Leon Paul blades over Allstar ones for fencing, but no one ever makes a comment along the lines of the Nikon user mentioned above. We just observe that different blades suit different styles and go on trying to hit each other.

In pistol shooting I use an Aeron Brno B96 when recieved wisdom is that the Stehr is the "best" match air pistol made, yet even then I never get "why didn't you buy a Stehr?" , or if I do a simple explanation of the merits of the B96 ends the discussion.

I wonder why it does happen with photography.
you don't have to be mad to post here



but it does help

flossie

Link Posted 06/06/2010 - 14:43
ha, you wait till you see two musicians argue passionatly about their brands...Particularly guitarists...
Still shooting in the dark (literally and metaphorically)...

K10D

Link Posted 06/06/2010 - 14:46
With fencing and shooting, the results are instant. The person who says this is better or I use what is considered to be the best has to prove their ability there and then.

Not so with photography. Same happens with HiFi etc. Easy to talk the talk where you don't have to prove or show immediate results.

Regards
cameradextrous _ Motorcycles etc. link

womble

Link Posted 06/06/2010 - 15:20
flossie wrote:
ha, you wait till you see two musicians argue passionatly about their brands...Particularly guitarists...

Not with tuba players, we don't have that much choice. More likely to be discussing beer...
Kris Lockyear
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera… they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.

My website
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.